Hero-of-Time Posted January 7, 2014 Author Posted January 7, 2014 @Dcubed In regards to the NOA comment you made. How much say and power do they really have though? For a long time now it seems that they operate under NCL, rather alongside them.
liger05 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 They've done plenty of work with western development in recent years. The only reason why people keep parroting this is because of that stupid one sided Emily Rogers article which purposely ignored all of the stuff that Iwata HAS actually done during his tenure; in order to big up the Howard Lincoln era as if it was a golden age for Nintendo (never mind the fact that he was responsible for some of Nintendo's biggest mistakes, like the fight against Night Trap that nearly brought government censorship upon the industry and established Nintendo's "Kiddy" image that still haunts them to this day) I simply look at where the market has been going say in the last 10 years and all I see is Iwata has ignored those trends. There is no good reason why I shouldn’t be able to purchase a broad genre of Nintendo published games on a Nintendo console. I don’t want Nintendo to stop making games I just want them to also make different type of games. I think a snippet from the interview with the Telegraph back in June 2012 says a lot about what Iwata and where Nintendo will go under his command. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/video-games/e3/9328561/Satoru-Iwata-interview-Nintendo-rivals-are-already-copying-the-Wii-U.html One area Nintendo are looking to be more competitive with Microsoft and Sony with the Wii U is in terms of third-party support. The Wii struggled with a dearth of games from other publishers, as they abandoned the Wii in favour of the more powerful consoles. "In terms of graphical capability, there was a sheer difference between the Wii and the other two devices, most notably between SD and HD," says Iwata. "We decided to differentiate the Wii not with graphics but with motion control. We believed that motion control was unique and would create more attraction rather than trying to make the Wii HD. On the other hand, we had lost the third-party support when they were focussing on multi-platform titles." Iwata is determined their new console will not suffer a similar fate. "In the case of the Wii U, we have decided to make it so that it is capable of doing whatever the other two consoles can do, so games are easily portable," says Iwata. "Even though the other machines are six years old, they have the advantage now because developers are capable of maximising the graphic capabilities, while with the new machine they will have to start from scratch to create the most capable graphics. So the Wii U has that room for improvement." "So in terms of performance, we don't see any issues for third-parties to be willing to make their software available. As we expand the install-base of the Wii U, I see greater opportunities for the third-parties to be able to provide the Wii U with quality software titles. And as well as the third-party multi-platform titles, we will have publishers making exclusive Wii U titles." On the one hand he acknowledged the power of the Wii hindered it when it came to getting third party multi platform titles yet still somehow thought releasing a console which would be capable of doing what the 360/PS3 was the solution to this problem. Where was the foresight into thinking what the XB1/PS4 was likely to be packing under the hood as now the Wii U is stuck in the same position as the Wii. Hindered by lack of power. Simply by talking to third party developers asking them what they want from hardware I’m pretty sure they would of realised that a console which matched the 360/PS3 wasn’t the answer. It all sounds like a foolproof plan. However, there is the threat of new hardware from Sony and Microsoft coming along and creating the same problem. Iwata doesn't see this being the case. "My impression is that the things that happened with Wii v 360 or Wii v PS3 won't happen again," he says. "If they decide to increase the spec numbers, will the consumers be able to realise the difference enough so that they can understand it's much superior to today's machine? And also, if they beef up the processing power, that simply means much more work for software developers to take advantage of those spec numbers. So I have to ask the question if that type of differentiation really makes sense. But I think further arguments must wait until probably next year, when they have finalised and disclosed whatever they are thinking about for the next generation of consoles." I would say yes consumers do realise that XB1/PS4 are superior to the PS3/360 and software developers are very happy to be using new hardware after 7/8 years with the last generation of consoles. More power isn’t simply about more polygons on screen it’s about giving developers more options and the tools required to produce a vision they may have which wasn’t possible before.
Dcubed Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 @Dcubed In regards to the NOA comment you made. How much say and power do they really have though? For a long time now it seems that they operate under NCL, rather alongside them. While I obviously I don't know the full extent of how much autonomy they have, they do seem to have more than most people here claim. From what we know, the Wii Crush fiasco was lead by the guys at NOA themselves and NOT NCL (long story short, NOA didn't like what NST were doing with Project Hammer and forced them to turn it into a bright coloured "casual" game starring Miis. There's some screens of their cancelled projects here) Also it seems that NOA Treehouse are the ones who decide on which games get localised in most cases and not NCL (except the ones that they mandate, like Mario and Zelda) according to this interview here “Well, actually we have an evaluation system in place here,” said Leslie Swan. “And through that process we get the game in, do an evaluation of it to determine what we think the sales potential is, and it comes down to essentially if we don’t think the sales potential is great, we don’t do it.” And supposedly NOA also actively seek out 3rd party support/exclusives from western developers (supposedly they managed to secure GTA Chinatown Wars on DS when they couldn't get Rockstar to give them a GTA game for Wii - I can't remember where the interview was that mentioned this, but I remember hearing it at the time. I'll try and dig it up later on when I have more time) So contrary to popular belief, NOA and NOE don't just sit on their arses doing nothing...
Ganepark32 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Simply by talking to third party developers asking them what they want from hardware I’m pretty sure they would of realised that a console which matched the 360/PS3 wasn’t the answer. This is the one thing I don't understand with Nintendo's current hardware philosophy. With both the 3DS and Wii U, they showed reels during their E3 conferences of developers talking about the console but it was always more geared towards the 'uniqueness' that the hardware brings, so the 3D on the 3DS or the Gamepad. In both of these instances, while these features may give developers some new outlets for interesting ideas (not on the 3D front but more the Streetpass/Spotpass thing for the 3DS), it's not what Western developers are interested in. I mean, it's great and all getting the likes of Ken Levine to talk about your new controller but given the titles he's been putting out, that's not what he's interested in. And missing out on those titles is hurting Nintendo. There's really no reason why the likes of Bioshock Infinite or Tomb Raider couldn't have hit the Wii U but they chose to push the controller rather than the hardware which may not be the main reason for those titles missing the console but I bet they're one of the reasons. With the price of developing titles nowadays, publishers want to maximise the amount of revenue they get in return and simply being able to port titles to as many consoles as possible without having to expend more time on extra features unique to one control scheme is going to push that margin for profit further out of reach. As we saw with the PS4 and Xbone, developers were wanting more power not to push better visuals but to allow for more possibilities in game design for AI and what not. And this is the one big area Nintendo have taken a misstep on the hardware front because they haven't asked what the developers want. Fine, they want to keep the cost of the hardware down when it hit the market (although that didn't work with the Wii U because they overspent on manufacturing the Gamepad) and keep power consumption down but if they aren't providing developers with a full suite of hardware in terms of CPU/GPU, Ram, etc., that'll allow them to push their new ideas then they're instantly putting themselves on the side lines as it'll make it as difficult as porting down from the 360/PS3 to the Wii again and developers in most cases didn't want to last time around so why do it now. Anyway, it's a long winded argument that's well trodden and as much as we'd like to think Nintendo has learned from their mistakes, it just doesn't seem like they have or as if they're willing to admit they were wrong. We can hope they'll resolve things in the future but it seems unlikely.
Rummy Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 I'm still waiting on all my promised indies and 3rd parties and all the work they'd be doing to get these guys onto the console.
Pestneb Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 tbh I don't think Nintendo made a huge mistake on the power/input decision. If you look at last gen, Wii outsold both the x360 and ps3, the winning cause? the unique input device. On the visuals aspect, tbh I don't really care, I still play GC games and am happy enough with those graphics. Sure I appreciate prettier games, but they aren't really a reason to buy a console. Tbh its like HD, I only have a HD tv because it happens to also be my PC monitor, otherwise I would still be totally content with SD, I may be on my own here, but never in my life did I sit back, watch a good film or tv series and think "damn, I wish I could see the pores in that actors skin" or "great football match, but I can't really make out the blades of grass". HD game consoles are similar to me, take human faces. I've seen great textures, but they haven't reached the point of getting realistic movement. I'd rate movement above textures... and I think most would. But we're sold this HD lie - a game is rubbish if it doesn't look pretty. A film is rubbish if it doesn't use the latest technological advances. Bull. The reason HD matters is because Sony and Microsoft have sold it hard. Why? great content is harder to pull off than great presentation. I also think thats a big reason 3rd parties avoid Nintendo consoles - they are scared. You look at the top selling games... The top 15 are all sold by one publisher. then you have GTA on PS2, Kinect adventures on X360. Then we go back to Nintendo to finish off the top 20. 18/20, Even in the last 5 years top 20 sellers: in sales (million units sold): Nintendo (153), Activision (100), Take-Two(40), Microsoft (21), Sony (11) In sales per game Nintendo (22), Microsoft (21) Take two (13) Activision (12) Sony (11) Games in the top 20 Activision (8) Nintendo (7) Take two (3) Sony/Microsoft (1 each) If I only look at home consoles, Nintendos millions sold per title jumps to 25 million, and drops games in top 20 by only 2, take two jumps to 16m sold per game and 4 titles in the top 20, and ubisoft enters in with a 10 million seller. Those numbers tell you one thing - Nintendo are the number one games software maker, and they are 100% absent from the other two consoles. Put this into context - do you think a sprinter in the last olympics would have prefered to be in a heat with mr bolt, or with pretty much any other heat? Fear is a powerful driver Of course, good games do get released on PS and XB as multiplatform games. Why? Its not because its cheaper to bridge between PS and XB due to similar architecture. Its because the Nintendo market for those 3rd party games has given up on Nintendo. Its those of you who moan that there are no 3rd party games, so you had to buy a PS/XB. of course, its not Nintendo's fault. lets say last gen, there were 10 million Wii owners willing to buy GTA. Not just willing, actually wanting it. What did they do? Well... They bought a 360, or PS3. its pretty much like wanting to shop at tesco, but instead of waiting for tesco to build in your town, you drive a 100 mile trip to the nearest branch. Why would tesco spend all that money building a market in your town, when actually all the muppets there are quite happy to ignore the markets in their own town and spend their money driving to an already existing branch? The reason XB and PS get GTA, is because they expect it. They don't buy another console to buy GTA, they wait for GTA to come get them. That is the difference. As Nintendo gamers we are told that if we want 3rd party, we need to buy another console. You have two choices. Spend 10 games worth of money on another console, for 1 game. Spend 10 games worth of money on games available on your current console. If you choose the former, then you have no reason to complain. You got played, bitch at yourself If you chose the former, its a shame the companies have so little faith in their own games, but there are plenty of games on the wii U to keep us occupied. I understand this forum is fairly committed to gaming, but actually the average attach rate is 10 games. I'm well on my way to exceed that on the wii, and I haven't spent as much as a gamer buying a PS4/X1 has paid on just getting the console into their hands. I'm loving the Wii U because its being shunned, so thanks Nintendo for making another awesome "shit" console that will be a treasure chest of gems. I do understand as hardcore gamers lots of you guysl like to buy 100 games for each console... but my GC collection is about 40-50 games big, and that was limited only by my budget, I can name off the top of my head a good 20 titles I missed out on due to a lack of funds. Nintendo saw what happened with the saturn, and they know that they can't afford to have a Nintendo saturn, so Wiii U WILL be supported to the end of its life... I suspect in a couple of years time we will be crying with joy at one or two of the gems Nintendo will have to give to the world just to save the Wii U :P All I know is games are meant to make you feel better, and the Wii U is doing that for me. Sorry for those of you who feel they made a terrible purchase. But the Wii U is worth far more than my Wii... mm... Actually my Wii lets me play my GC games so maybe that equals the score just about!
Sheikah Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 The main point is Pestneb, if you and everyone else was happy with the current power/graphics/non-HD status of the existing consoles, there would simply be no point in them ever making new consoles. If power never needed to be improved to satisfy consumers, there would simply never be a need for a new console. There's no excuse why OS couldn't be updated to accomodate new peripherals just like PC with drivers. The blunt truth is that most people do want a more powerful and upgraded system and it isn't because companies have brainwashed them to. It's the same reason why people want a new iPhone or smartphone as opposed to sticking with a Nokia 3310. Technology will always improve, and most people want it to.
Hero-of-Time Posted January 7, 2014 Author Posted January 7, 2014 given up on Nintendo. Its those of you who moan that there are no 3rd party games, so you had to buy a PS/XB. of course, its not Nintendo's fault. lets say last gen, there were 10 million Wii owners willing to buy GTA. Not just willing, actually wanting it. What did they do? Well... They bought a 360, or PS3. its pretty much like wanting to shop at tesco, but instead of waiting for tesco to build in your town, you drive a 100 mile trip to the nearest branch. Why would tesco spend all that money building a market in your town, when actually all the muppets there are quite happy to ignore the markets in their own town and spend their money driving to an already existing branch? The reason XB and PS get GTA, is because they expect it. They don't buy another console to buy GTA, they wait for GTA to come get them. That is the difference. As Nintendo gamers we are told that if we want 3rd party, we need to buy another console. You have two choices. Spend 10 games worth of money on another console, for 1 game. Spend 10 games worth of money on games available on your current console. If you choose the former, then you have no reason to complain. You got played, bitch at yourself I find this whole comment wrong and flat out insulting. There are a number of exclusives, spread out among all 3 platforms and all are worth playing. If I had just stuck exclusively with Nintendo then I would have missed out on playing the likes of Gears of War, Halo, Uncharted, Heavy Rain, Devil May Cry, Dino Crisis, Blue Dragon, Lost Odssey, Final Fantasy, Puppeteer, Beyond, Crackdown, Eternal Sonata....this list goes on and on. If you can't afford or choose not to get another console, then fine, but calling out people for spreading their gaming wings is bang out of order. Nintendo's lack of 3rd party support is very much their fault. Back in the NES/SNES days they screwed over companies left right and centre. Then the N64 era came and they decided to go cartridge instead of CD, like the rest of the industry. Gamecube had mini discs and wasn't a quick easy port for games. Wii was underpowered compared to the other two and as such quick porting of games wasn't financially feasible. The fact is that if you want an abundance of strong 3rd party support then you will need to get another console. People have been waiting 3 generations for Nintendo to sort the situation out and it doesn't look like it will be sorted anytime soon. I love my Nintendo consoles, yes even the Wii U but i'm not blind to the fact to their faults as a company.
Sheikah Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 I also don't really understand what you're getting at when you say this: lets say last gen, there were 10 million Wii owners willing to buy GTA. Not just willing, actually wanting it. What did they do? Well... They bought a 360, or PS3. its pretty much like wanting to shop at tesco, but instead of waiting for tesco to build in your town, you drive a 100 mile trip to the nearest branch. Why would tesco spend all that money building a market in your town, when actually all the muppets there are quite happy to ignore the markets in their own town and spend their money driving to an already existing branch? The reason XB and PS get GTA, is because they expect it. They don't buy another console to buy GTA, they wait for GTA to come get them. That is the difference. As Nintendo gamers we are told that if we want 3rd party, we need to buy another console. You have two choices. Spend 10 games worth of money on another console, for 1 game. Spend 10 games worth of money on games available on your current console. If you choose the former, then you have no reason to complain. You got played, bitch at yourself The only way one could get 'played' in this scenario is if they were a hardcore Nintendo fanboy unwilling to try any other franchise other than GTA. Really, the chances are that if you bought a PS3 or 360 for GTA, there'd be plenty more games that you'd also be interested in. The PS3 has a huge library of titles and most new games are still being released on it. I find this whole comment wrong and flat out insulting. There are a number of exclusives, spread out among all 3 platforms and all are worth playing. If I had just stuck exclusively with Nintendo then I would have missed out on playing the likes of Gears of War, Halo, Uncharted, Heavy Rain, Devil May Cry, Dino Crisis, Blue Dragon, Lost Odssey, Final Fantasy, Puppeteer, Beyond, Crackdown, Eternal Sonata....this list goes on and on. If you can't afford or choose not to get another console, then fine, but calling out people for spreading their gaming wings is bang out of order. Nintendo's lack of 3rd party support is very much their fault. Back in the NES/SNES days they screwed over companies left right and centre. Then the N64 era came and they decided to go cartridge instead of CD, like the rest of the industry. Gamecube had mini discs and wasn't a quick easy port for games. Wii was underpowered compared to the other two and as such quick porting of games wasn't financially feasible. The fact is that if you want an abundance of strong 3rd party support then you will need to get another console. People have been waiting 3 generations for Nintendo to sort the situation out and it doesn't look like it will be sorted anytime soon. I love my Nintendo consoles, yes even the Wii U but i'm not blind to the fact to their faults as a company. :p you commented on the exact same thing which I only just saw after I hit reply. Yeah, bit of a ridiculous comment really.
Pestneb Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 The main point is Pestneb, if you and everyone else was happy with the current power/graphics/non-HD status of the existing consoles, there would simply be no point in them ever making new consoles. If power never needed to be improved to satisfy consumers, there would simply never be a need for a new console. There's no excuse why OS couldn't be updated to accomodate new peripherals just like PC with drivers. The blunt truth is that most people do want a more powerful and upgraded system and it isn't because companies have brainwashed them to. It's the same reason why people want a new iPhone or smartphone as opposed to sticking with a Nokia 3310. Technology will always improve, and most people want it to. If Sega or Nintendo had won the console wars back at the snes/megadrive era prior to Sony's involvement, I do wonder if we would still be playing 2-d games.... I imagine, if no other competitor had emerged it is possible. With phones, actually they haven't advanced much. wireless home phones have remained pretty static in terms of technology, and mobile phones no longer exist. Now there are electronic consumer devices with phone capabilities tagged on, but the mobile phone market itself doesn't really exist as I see it anymore. ipad/iphone/ipod are used almost interchangeably by many younger people I have come into contact with. Technology will always increase, and most people will buy into it.
Sheikah Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 Well you said it yourself, most people will buy into new technology. Which is why the Wii U should have given them the new technology they wanted.
liger05 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 tbh I don't think Nintendo made a huge mistake on the power/input decision.If you look at last gen, Wii outsold both the x360 and ps3, the winning cause? the unique input device. On the visuals aspect, tbh I don't really care, I still play GC games and am happy enough with those graphics. Sure I appreciate prettier games, but they aren't really a reason to buy a console. Yet even though the Wii sold bucketloads Nintendo themselves accepted that they managed to attract a new audience but lose a big chunk of the ‘gamer’ audience which they wanted to get back with the Wii U. The Wii was lightning in a bottle and trying to replicate that was impossible. Nobody is saying you or anyone else cannot be more than happy with graphic fidelity the Wii U can produce however a very important stakeholder is game developers and if they are not happy with what the Wii U is capable of doing well then you have a problem as we saw with the Wii and now Wii U. Tbh its like HD, I only have a HD tv because it happens to also be my PC monitor, otherwise I would still be totally content with SD, I may be on my own here, but never in my life did I sit back, watch a good film or tv series and think "damn, I wish I could see the pores in that actors skin" or "great football match, but I can't really make out the blades of grass".HD game consoles are similar to me, take human faces. I've seen great textures, but they haven't reached the point of getting realistic movement. I'd rate movement above textures... and I think most would. But we're sold this HD lie - a game is rubbish if it doesn't look pretty. A film is rubbish if it doesn't use the latest technological advances. Bull. What lie are you talking about? Who would of said colour TV was needed. Why not go out and by yourself a Black and white TV and I’m sure you can have plenty fun with that. Even better forget about a wii u go and buy yourself an Atari. Who needs more polygons when you have that. Who needs cars, a horse and cart is more than capable of getting a person from A to B. The reason HD matters is because Sony and Microsoft have sold it hard. Why? great content is harder to pull off than great presentation. I also think thats a big reason 3rd parties avoid Nintendo consoles - they are scared. You look at the top selling games... The top 15 are all sold by one publisher. then you have GTA on PS2, Kinect adventures on X360. Then we go back to Nintendo to finish off the top 20. 18/20, Even in the last 5 years top 20 sellers: in sales (million units sold): Nintendo (153), Activision (100), Take-Two(40), Microsoft (21), Sony (11) In sales per game Nintendo (22), Microsoft (21) Take two (13) Activision (12) Sony (11) Games in the top 20 Activision (8) Nintendo (7) Take two (3) Sony/Microsoft (1 each) If I only look at home consoles, Nintendos millions sold per title jumps to 25 million, and drops games in top 20 by only 2, take two jumps to 16m sold per game and 4 titles in the top 20, and ubisoft enters in with a 10 million seller. Those numbers tell you one thing - Nintendo are the number one games software maker, and they are 100% absent from the other two consoles. Put this into context - do you think a sprinter in the last olympics would have prefered to be in a heat with mr bolt, or with pretty much any other heat? Fear is a powerful driver Of course, good games do get released on PS and XB as multiplatform games. Why? Its not because its cheaper to bridge between PS and XB due to similar architecture. Its because the Nintendo market for those 3rd party games has given up on Nintendo. Its those of you who moan that there are no 3rd party games, so you had to buy a PS/XB. of course, its not Nintendo's fault. lets say last gen, there were 10 million Wii owners willing to buy GTA. Not just willing, actually wanting it. What did they do? Well... They bought a 360, or PS3. its pretty much like wanting to shop at tesco, but instead of waiting for tesco to build in your town, you drive a 100 mile trip to the nearest branch. Why would tesco spend all that money building a market in your town, when actually all the muppets there are quite happy to ignore the markets in their own town and spend their money driving to an already existing branch? The reason XB and PS get GTA, is because they expect it. They don't buy another console to buy GTA, they wait for GTA to come get them. That is the difference. As Nintendo gamers we are told that if we want 3rd party, we need to buy another console. You have two choices. Spend 10 games worth of money on another console, for 1 game. Spend 10 games worth of money on games available on your current console. If you choose the former, then you have no reason to complain. You got played, bitch at yourself Yep it surely has nothing do with the fact that time and time again third party games bomb on Nintendo hardware. Publishers don’t leave money on the table. If money could be made producing games for Wii U they would be doing just that. But not the real reason is they are scared of Nintendo. I don’t think so!!
Pestneb Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 I find this whole comment wrong and flat out insulting. Possibly because I wrote it out in a fairly haphazard way and failed to make myself clear. There are a number of exclusives, spread out among all 3 platforms and all are worth playing. If I had just stuck exclusively with Nintendo then I would have missed out on playing the likes of Gears of War, Halo, Uncharted, Heavy Rain, Devil May Cry, Dino Crisis, Blue Dragon, Lost Odssey, Final Fantasy, Puppeteer, Beyond, Crackdown, Eternal Sonata....this list goes on and on. If you can't afford or choose not to get another console, then fine, but calling out people for spreading their gaming wings is bang out of order. If you are talking about exclusives then fine, I was talking more along the lines of multiplatform games, such as GTA which is available on PS, XB and PC. I wasn't calling out people for spreading out their "gaming wings", I was calling out people who complain about having been forced to do so. I wasn't clear on that yes, but that is the situation to which I was referring. Nintendo's lack of 3rd party support is very much their fault. Back in the NES/SNES days they screwed over companies left right and centre. Then the N64 era came and they decided to go cartridge instead of CD, like the rest of the industry. Gamecube had mini discs and wasn't a quick easy port for games. Wii was underpowered compared to the other two and as such quick porting of games wasn't financially feasible. The fact is that if you want an abundance of strong 3rd party support then you will need to get another console. People have been waiting 3 generations for Nintendo to sort the situation out and it doesn't look like it will be sorted anytime soon. I love my Nintendo consoles, yes even the Wii U but i'm not blind to the fact to their faults as a company. That's my main point. You are the market for 3rd parties. The exclusive Wii U market doesn't exist, so they have no need to cater to it. Therefore, try as they may Nintendo aren't going to get those games on the Wii U. What lie are you talking about? Who would of said colour TV was needed. Why not go out and by yourself a Black and white TV and I’m sure you can have plenty fun with that. Even better forget about a wii u go and buy yourself an Atari. Who needs more polygons when you have that. Who needs cars, a horse and cart is more than capable of getting a person from A to B. While colour tv is a nice improvement most of the time, it is also in certain instances necessary. the black lipstick they used to use in black and white films is a case in point - sometimes the contrast we see due to colour variations isn't accurately portrayed in black and white. Also I can see the point of HD. But actually the blades of grass in a football match, individual hairs on a persons head don't really improve my enjoyment of a football game, or the story in a film. In fact, special effects in older films that looked adequate on sd look utter shite on hd. If you want to travel by horse and cart over large distances, fine. Some technological advances genuinely advance. I'm not suggesting we ought to be eating raw meat and going everywhere by foot. I'm just making the point too often technology is too focused on bringing in money. And yes I am fully aware that money is what makes the world turn round, which interestingly is why our days are a bit longer since the recession. Yep it surely has nothing do with the fact that time and time again third party games bomb on Nintendo hardware. Publishers don’t leave money on the table. If money could be made producing games for Wii U they would be doing just that. But not the real reason is they are scared of Nintendo. I don’t think so!! My point - the market for their games has migrated. The money on the table is on Wii U, or on the xbox/playstation. If every Xbox owner owned a PS, but not the other way round, I'm sure 3rd parties would ditch xbox. And of course they are scared of releasing games on a Nintendo home console. time and time again third party games bomb on Nintendo hardware Is there anything scarier for a publisher than having their game bomb? yes. Not knowing why their games bomb. So Liger, why don't 3rd parties games sell on Nintendo?
Goron_3 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 I also think thats a big reason 3rd parties avoid Nintendo consoles - they are scared. Your whole post is terrible but that line is laughable. 3rd parties give Nintendo a lot of information in terms of what they want from a games console. The problem is, Nintendo don't tend to provide the industry with a console that the industry and gamers need. The N64 (cartridges and not CD's), Wii U (random controller which Iwata admitted was almost dropped) show that. 3rd parties would love nothing more than to produce games for Nintendo systems as it would make them money (and a lot of it). Look at how burnt Ubisoft have been by the Wii U..they've put a lot of effort into the system because they want to support Nintendo. They certainly aren't scared of them.
liger05 Posted January 7, 2014 Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) Is there anything scarier for a publisher than having their game bomb?yes. Not knowing why their games bomb. So Liger, why don't 3rd parties games sell on Nintendo? I think its down to Nintendo not cultivating there own fanbase into experiencing other games which are not Mario, Zelda, DK etc etc. By that I mean different games and not just different characters. Why do you think you hear developers talk about how 'the nintendo audience isnt one they aim for'? Nintendo has to produce different genre of games to get its own audience accustomed to the type of games third parties produce. If Nintendo published a FPS for instance and started to get traction with such a title dont you think third parties who produce FPS would suddenly see an audience to work with? Look at the games Ubisoft has put on the wii u. Correct me if I'm wrong but Rayman Legend performed the best (even though sales were not great) which is not really a surprise when you look at what Rayman is. A colourful side scrolling 2D platformer which can be compared to A 2D mario platformer. Edited January 7, 2014 by liger05
david.dakota Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Nintendo are very conservative about expanding their studios staff capacity because it comes with the very strong risk of destroying the company culture of their developers (something which has happened in force to many other developers). Instead Nintendo utilise different methods other than sheer brute force of numbers in order to increase their production capacity, without damaging their development culture (which is why you've seen Nintendo rely much more on collaborative development and art asset outsourcing in the last 3 or so years) Which perfectly explains the massive recruitment drive Nintendo has had in the last couple of years.
Dcubed Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Which perfectly explains the massive recruitment drive Nintendo has had in the last couple of years. Define "massive". In the past 7 odd years, Nintendo's staff count has risen from roughly 4,300 worldwide to 5,200 worldwide (and that includes their acquisitions like Monolith and Mobiclip/NERD). To put that into perspective, Ubisoft employs almost double the amount of staff as Nintendo (around 9,200 worldwide) and they don't make hardware either...
Pestneb Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 I think its down to Nintendo not cultivating there own fanbase into experiencing other games which are not Mario, Zelda, DK etc etc. By that I mean different games and not just different characters. Why do you think you hear developers talk about how 'the nintendo audience isnt one they aim for'? Nintendo has to produce different genre of games to get its own audience accustomed to the type of games third parties produce. If Nintendo published a FPS for instance and started to get traction with such a title dont you think third parties who produce FPS would suddenly see an audience to work with? Look at the games Ubisoft has put on the wii u. Correct me if I'm wrong but Rayman Legend performed th e best (even though sales were not great) which is not really a surprise when you look at what Rayman is. A colourful side scrolling 2D platformer which can be compared to A 2D mario platformer. Interesting, but I see too flaws in that logic. 1) Nintendo need to create games in different genres to cultivate a market for that genre. But you then point out that ubisofts rayman legends which follows the kind of genre Nintendo have cultivated a market for as a title you feel failed. its a bit early to compare legends, but looking at origins, PS3 sold about 900k X360 700kish wii around the 500k mark. Why is that? New super mario bros wii sold 27 million 2 years earlier... so the market was there. 2) As a software company, why should it be Nintendo that invest to build a user base for third parties? Are 3rd parties incapable to do this themselves? And even if third parties are incapable, if Nintendo were to carve out a new userbase, would it not be more financially intelligent for them to fill that space themselves? A number of you guys seem to have gotten your knickers in a twist, which is cool, I didn't take enough care in my initial posts, I forgot where I was posting. My main point is this: 1) Companies don't turn down "money on the table" 2) 5 million users surely constitutes "money on the table". 3) There appear to be plenty of Wii U owners (presumably?) who would like those 3rd party developers to be supporting the Wii U. 4) Nintendo home consoles consistently turn out top sellers. So what is the problem of no 3rd parties on the Wii U? the problem is there is very little problem. If I did a venn diagram of "complain about lack of third part support" and "own just a Nintendo console" on this forum, I imagine there would be few in the middle ground. Lots of people in this middle ground would represent a viable market for third parties. My impression is very much that those people bemoaning a lack of 3rd parties on the Wii U own alternate consoles. In that case they would be the reason there are no 3rd party titles - They already own a console that has said titles available, so if they were inclined to purchase the title they will do so on that console. 3rd parties : why make a game for a console with no market? Nintendo: Why out lay significant finances for a flop that won't affect the market? If Nintendo had GTA released and COD, both on the wii U, both would fall flat, because the majority of the markets for those consoles are on the other two consoles, even if they also own the Wii U. The failure of those two would validate the view that those games don't sell on Nintendo, simply compounding the problem. So to those happily saying its all Nintendo's fault, What at present can they do, in your view? I totally agree that there are mistakes on Nintendo's part that have led them here, the N64 lack of space for data, the GC for image problems, but after the GC, with the flop of RE4 amongst other games, I see little Nintendo could realistically do beyond what they have been trying since.
Ashley Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Hero-of-Time also made a topic about that article: http://www.n-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54065 Started reading it in bed and then realised how bloody long it is!
liger05 Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Interesting, but I see too flaws in that logic.1) Nintendo need to create games in different genres to cultivate a market for that genre. But you then point out that ubisofts rayman legends which follows the kind of genre Nintendo have cultivated a market for as a title you feel failed. its a bit early to compare legends, but looking at origins, PS3 sold about 900k X360 700kish wii around the 500k mark. Why is that? New super mario bros wii sold 27 million 2 years earlier... so the market was there. Rayman legends bombed on every platform. I was making the point that even so it was still the best selling 3rd party title ubisoft has released on the wii u. As for origins well when that was released on the Wii, the Wii was well on the decline by then. The market you speak of that purchased Super Mario Bros 2 saw a huge chunk move away from the Wii and they are not coming back. I’ll give you another example of a third party success. Sonic all stars racing. 310,000 copies sold on the Wii U and 190,000 were on the 3DS. Is this a surprise? Not not really as the Nintendo fanbase likes kart racers. However get a title like Assassins Creed on the Wii U and it’s a total bomba. 2) As a software company, why should it be Nintendo that invest to build a user base for third parties? Are 3rd parties incapable to do this themselves? And even if third parties are incapable, if Nintendo were to carve out a new userbase, would it not be more financially intelligent for them to fill that space themselves? Because third parties do not need Nintendo. They have playstation/Xbox which has plenty of gamers which will buy those games. Hasn’t the debacle which the Wii U has been shown you that third parties are only beneficial to a platform and its in there interest to get third parties supporting the platform. Nintendo cannot support a platform by themselves (unless your happy with 1 game every few months), not to mention Nintendo make money from third parties. Third party support brings in licensing fees so yes it is in Nintendo’s interest to create a viable ecosystem where third parties can make money on a Nintendo platform. A number of you guys seem to have gotten your knickers in a twist, which is cool, I didn't take enough care in my initial posts, I forgot where I was posting. My main point is this: 1) Companies don't turn down "money on the table" 2) 5 million users surely constitutes "money on the table". 3) There appear to be plenty of Wii U owners (presumably?) who would like those 3rd party developers to be supporting the Wii U. 4) Nintendo home consoles consistently turn out top sellers. 5 mil users who are not even buying Nintendo software is not attractive to third parties. Look at the sales of numerous third party games that have been released. Why would a publisher put a game on the platform when history suggests it wont sell. So what is the problem of no 3rd parties on the Wii U? the problem is there is very little problem. If I did a venn diagram of "complain about lack of third part support" and "own just a Nintendo console" on this forum, I imagine there would be few in the middle ground. Lots of people in this middle ground would represent a viable market for third parties. My impression is very much that those people bemoaning a lack of 3rd parties on the Wii U own alternate consoles. In that case they would be the reason there are no 3rd party titles - They already own a console that has said titles available, so if they were inclined to purchase the title they will do so on that console. As I said the problem is Nintendo cannot support the console themselves and thats not forgetting that they are in competition with platforms that have all those games. A parent could look at buying a wii u for a child looks at the games and tries to find a Fifa, madden, GTA, Battlefield etc etc and realises those games are not on the platform. Oh well I think I will buy a console which does have those games. 3rd parties : why make a game for a console with no market?Nintendo: Why out lay significant finances for a flop that won't affect the market? If Nintendo had GTA released and COD, both on the wii U, both would fall flat, because the majority of the markets for those consoles are on the other two consoles, even if they also own the Wii U. The failure of those two would validate the view that those games don't sell on Nintendo, simply compounding the problem. So to those happily saying its all Nintendo's fault, What at present can they do, in your view? I totally agree that there are mistakes on Nintendo's part that have led them here, the N64 lack of space for data, the GC for image problems, but after the GC, with the flop of RE4 amongst other games, I see little Nintendo could realistically do beyond what they have been trying since As I have said Nintendo need to look at the reasons why third party games dont sell on Nintendo platforms and then look at how to address this.
Fused King Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 I think one of the things NINTENDO can do regarding their 3rd party situation is nurture new and upcoming indies and new development studios with love and care and have open conversations with them. As has been said before, even if NINTENDO were to listen to all the major publishers/development studios like Sony did with their PS4, odds are their games still wouldn't sell on their system because the audience isn't really there on NINTENDO consoles. The best they can do is look to the future, create strong ties with that future and hope that their image might change from 'kiddy' to 'respectable game company that has you covered when it comes to a wide variety of games, be it family friendly or the core experience'. Iwata's Wider and Deeper if you will. Cutting some partnership with Valve would be a great first step towards this future and a strong partnerships between Japan and the West. I don't know how it would work, but I suspect they could learn a lot from eachother. --------- I got to say though fellow N-E'ers, these are exciting times. There are a good handful of scenarios that NINTENDO could take, and, as we shall see, they will take the route no one suspected or even thought of. They'll pull a Wii Fit Trainer once more, I tell ya! But I seriously long for a world in which the young'uns who are growing up with games now (with their fancy iPad gaming and their lust for GTA or TitanFall) will grow up into people who don't look down on NINTENDO simply because they make games with colour or smiling characters in it. I hope that we will one day look upon gaming in general as a wonderful medium that knows many different forms, but that not one is better than the other.
Retro_Link Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) Another multi-platform/generation game that will be missing a Wii U version [tweet]420718994174124033[/tweet] and before anyone says it's not a big loss because of Colonial Marines, this game is by a different team and is an incredible looking survival horror... http://www.n-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54064 Edited January 8, 2014 by Retro_Link
Serebii Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 Another multi-platform/generation game that will be missing a Wii U version [tweet]420718994174124033[/tweet] and before anyone says it's not a big loss because of Colonial Marines, this game is by a different team and is an incredible looking survival horror... http://www.n-europe.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54064 So did Colonial Marines before release
Retro_Link Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 (edited) So did Colonial Marines before releaseSo did Sonic Lost World, does that mean you won't give the next Sonic game a look. Like I said, different development studio, and I'm pretty sure SEGA will be doing everything they can to more than make up for the last Alien game. Edited January 8, 2014 by Retro_Link
Rummy Posted January 8, 2014 Posted January 8, 2014 I think one of the things NINTENDO can do regarding their 3rd party situation is nurture new and upcoming indies and new development studios with love and care and have open conversations with them. This. This so much. It was talked about - and what exactly has happened with/to it? Get on Steam, look at some of the popular little indie titles - get in touch, put some resources into getting it onto your console. Overhaul eShop interface and put a big focus into downloadable indies and 3rd parties - do sales etc. Basically...do Steam, on Wii U :p
Recommended Posts